Topics

Unfair dismissal

New and updated

  • Type:
    Employment law cases

    Employee fairly dismissed for disclosing details of job applicant

    In this case, an employee was fairly dismissed for disclosing details of job applicant.

  • Type:
    Employment law cases

    Case round-up

    Susannah Jarvis (associate) and Kate Williams (professional support lawyer), Addleshaw Goddard, analyse important recent rulings.

  • Date:
    27 January 2010
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    (1) Duncombe and others (2) Fletcher v Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families

    The Court of Appeal has held that an employee who was employed under a series of fixed-term contracts and whose contract was terminated could bring a claim of unfair dismissal despite the fact that he was employed to work outside Great Britain. Territorial limitations to unfair dismissal rights should be modified where necessary to enable a right emanating from European law to be enforced.

  • Date:
    26 January 2010
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    Whistleblowing: Disclosure of "information" requires statement of facts

    In Cavendish Munro Professional Risks Management Ltd v Geduld [2010] IRLR 38 EAT, the EAT held that the employment tribunal erred in deciding that a solicitor's letter amounted to a qualifying disclosure for the purposes of s.43B of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The letter merely stated the employee's position in an ongoing dispute, without alleging any facts.

  • Date:
    9 December 2009
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    Unfair dismissal: Norton Tool principle does not apply to unfair constructive dismissal

    In Stuart Peters Ltd v Bell [2009] IRLR 941 CA, the Court of Appeal held that, in a case of constructive unfair dismissal, the Norton Tool principle that compensation for unfair dismissal without notice must include a sum representing the employee's full pay during his or her notice period does not apply, and the employee must give credit for any earnings during this period.

  • Date:
    23 November 2009
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    Age discrimination: Dismissal to avoid age-related benefit was discriminatory

    In Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Wooster EAT/0441/08, the EAT upheld a finding that the redundancy dismissal of a 49-year-old employee amounted to age discrimination. The tribunal was entitled to find that the employer could have found alternative work for him, but that it had failed to do so because it was concerned that, if he remained employed up to the age of 50, he would be entitled to a more generous early retirement package.

  • Date:
    11 November 2009
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    TUPE: Requirement to move to location outside scope of mobility clause in original contract was fundamental breach of contract

    In Tapere v South London and Maudsley NHS Trust EAT/0410/08, the EAT held that, in requiring a transferred employee to move to a location outside the scope of the mobility clause in her original contract of employment with the transferor, the transferee had acted in fundamental breach of contract. The employee's subsequent resignation therefore amounted to a constructive dismissal. Further, the transferee's attempt to move her place of work amounted to a substantial change in her working conditions to her material detriment. She was, therefore, also entitled to be treated as having been dismissed under reg.4(9) of the TUPE Regulations.

  • Date:
    11 November 2009
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    Redundancy: Employer was entitled to determine narrow pool for redundancy selection

    In Lomond Motors Ltd v Clark EATS/0019/09, the EAT held that an employment tribunal had erred in finding a dismissal unfair on the grounds that the redundancy selection pool had been incorrectly drawn. The tribunal had substituted its own view for that of a reasonable employer. The tribunal had further erred in its assessment of compensation.

  • Type:
    Employment law cases

    Case of the week: Unfair dismissal and pension loss

    This week's case of the week, provided by DLA Piper, covers unfair dismissal and pension loss.

  • Date:
    14 October 2009
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    Henderson v Connect (South Tyneside) Ltd

    The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that an employer fairly dismissed an employee when a client refused to have him carry out work for it.

About this topic

HR and legal information and guidance relating to unfair dismissal.